"Let's make a Superman show but do not include Superman." I have no interest in a show just about a young Bruce Wayne, I know they were planning one years ago before BB came out...glad that never got made.

Well that quoted article said nothing about a new Batman series using that same Smallville formula, it just said it would be a substitute for it after this last season.

__________________
Little fly upon the wall,
Ain't you got no friends at all?
Wanna see God?
*splat*

I hate Smallville so much that I actually get more enjoyment out of SUPERMAN III: the richard pryor chronicles. There I said it!

__________________Jerry and Joe were gentlemen. Bob Kane was a thief and a glory-hound who was more concerned about profit and prestige. I cannot bring myself to believe the same things about Stan Lee in regards to his two main contributors, Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko. I'm inclined to believe Stan's version of events as he has usually been very willing to credit his co-conspirators, but the truth is because different versions of credit exists, we will never truly know.

I hate Smallville so much that I actually get more enjoyment out of SUPERMAN III: the richard pryor chronicles. There I said it!

__________________Jerry and Joe were gentlemen. Bob Kane was a thief and a glory-hound who was more concerned about profit and prestige. I cannot bring myself to believe the same things about Stan Lee in regards to his two main contributors, Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko. I'm inclined to believe Stan's version of events as he has usually been very willing to credit his co-conspirators, but the truth is because different versions of credit exists, we will never truly know.

NOLAN did good with Batman, but he limited himself severely. We need a new director to take Batman further into the comics world and still be semi-realistic.

Things I want from a new director are: MORE explorations of WAYNE ENTERPRISES and new villains we have not seen before. A willingness to do a proper gray Bat-suit and a cool batcave.

__________________Jerry and Joe were gentlemen. Bob Kane was a thief and a glory-hound who was more concerned about profit and prestige. I cannot bring myself to believe the same things about Stan Lee in regards to his two main contributors, Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko. I'm inclined to believe Stan's version of events as he has usually been very willing to credit his co-conspirators, but the truth is because different versions of credit exists, we will never truly know.

Were he making a massive long line of Batman films or a tv series, I could agree but that is not the case. Nolan saying that he won't utilize characters like Freeze or Robin is not a problem whatsoever because Nolan's world is finite. You can only cover so much within three films. And as long as he has enough material to cover within his three films, he is not limited.

"We want to see the newest things. That is because we want to see the future, even if only momentarily. It is the moment in which, even if we don't completely understand what we have glimpsed, we are nonetheless touched by it. This is what we have come to call art." -Takashi Murakami

Were he making a massive long line of Batman films or a tv series, I could agree but that is not the case. Nolan saying that he won't utilize characters like Freeze or Robin is not a problem whatsoever because Nolan's world is finite. You can only cover so much within three films. And as long as he has enough material to cover within his three films, he is not limited.

I somewhat disagree. Nolan has largely used much of his films to cinematically explain that his movies are grounded in reality. He made this choice before it was ever decided how many films he would do. Batman Begins is a perfect film. The inclusion of Lucius Fox was a genius stroke, but he still could have found ways to bring villains like Penguin or Croc to the Nolan universe. If he had decided to do a "comic book" world where the fantastic elements were possible, he could have had the same level of seriousness and the same levels of courtroom style drama without the hyper-realism because he could have made his film grounded and less over the top the way the first series of films was.

__________________Jerry and Joe were gentlemen. Bob Kane was a thief and a glory-hound who was more concerned about profit and prestige. I cannot bring myself to believe the same things about Stan Lee in regards to his two main contributors, Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko. I'm inclined to believe Stan's version of events as he has usually been very willing to credit his co-conspirators, but the truth is because different versions of credit exists, we will never truly know.

I somewhat disagree. Nolan has largely used much of his films to cinematically explain that his movies are grounded in reality. He made this choice before it was ever decided how many films he would do. Batman Begins is a perfect film. The inclusion of Lucius Fox was a genius stroke, but he still could have found ways to bring villains like Penguin or Croc to the Nolan universe.

But here's your catch 22...... Penguin and Croc were not necessary to his stories.

Tim Burton could have included Croc, Man-Bat, Mad Hatter, and Scarecrow in his films. But he didn't... so it doesn't matter a hill of beans. In the end it doesn't matter if a director is limited or not because he's only capable of handling so much within 2 or 3 films.

What does it matter if Croc was possible in Burton's films when he was never part of the story?

What does it matter if Croc was not possible in Nolan's films when he's not a part of the story?

Croc was possible in one of those series and not possible in another but guess what? It doesn't matter one iota because he wasn't utilized in either. See what I'm getting at... potential means absolutely nothing when it's not accounted for.

Quote:

If he had decided to do a "comic book" world where the fantastic elements were possible, he could have had the same level of seriousness and the same levels of courtroom style drama without the hyper-realism because he could have made his film grounded and less over the top the way the first series of films was.

But Nolan did not want to create a gothic fantasy or neon filled "comic book world." He wanted one set in the real world and that's what he's given us.

"We want to see the newest things. That is because we want to see the future, even if only momentarily. It is the moment in which, even if we don't completely understand what we have glimpsed, we are nonetheless touched by it. This is what we have come to call art." -Takashi Murakami

Your being subjective. As far as what he did or didn't do, he could have gone either way. My point was, if he had done a "comic book" style universe, he could have kept the exact same tone and style as he did in his two films.

But I see your point about potential being lost.

__________________Jerry and Joe were gentlemen. Bob Kane was a thief and a glory-hound who was more concerned about profit and prestige. I cannot bring myself to believe the same things about Stan Lee in regards to his two main contributors, Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko. I'm inclined to believe Stan's version of events as he has usually been very willing to credit his co-conspirators, but the truth is because different versions of credit exists, we will never truly know.

Yes. Gotham Central is very much like the Nolanverse in many ways, but it would be neat to see a Bat movie that could feature villains like Croc and Clayface and Freeze.

__________________Jerry and Joe were gentlemen. Bob Kane was a thief and a glory-hound who was more concerned about profit and prestige. I cannot bring myself to believe the same things about Stan Lee in regards to his two main contributors, Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko. I'm inclined to believe Stan's version of events as he has usually been very willing to credit his co-conspirators, but the truth is because different versions of credit exists, we will never truly know.

But, I always feel no one can bring those characters alive as well as BTAS.

I agree!

__________________Jerry and Joe were gentlemen. Bob Kane was a thief and a glory-hound who was more concerned about profit and prestige. I cannot bring myself to believe the same things about Stan Lee in regards to his two main contributors, Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko. I'm inclined to believe Stan's version of events as he has usually been very willing to credit his co-conspirators, but the truth is because different versions of credit exists, we will never truly know.

Also, the it would be easy to accept a new trilogy in ten years that has more science fiction villians if they built off of what Nolan created already. This would be like how Batman: Year One can lead into Batman: The Man Who Laughs into Batman & The Mad Men, etc...

Each "Trilogy" can be a metaphor for arcs in comics. New Cast/Directors every 10 years kind of like how the comics have reigning Authors/Artists for 3-4 years but keeping in line one rough "conitnuity" so there is no need for re-hash or full out rebooting like Spider-Man is doing if ever "trilogy" that follows is still bringing their A game.

I think Noan can squeeze Freeze and Clayface after major remodeling of the characters. Hey, I couldnt think of how can he adjust Joker into our world yet with a big makeover he did. If he got Joker in, he can bring anybody in. Dont forget he already adjusted an immortal warlock and a white skinned clown. He can fit anybody in

I think Noan can squeeze Freeze and Clayface after major remodeling of the characters. Hey, I couldnt think of how can he adjust Joker into our world yet with a big makeover he did. If he got Joker in, he can bring anybody in. Dont forget he already adjusted an immortal warlock and a white skinned clown. He can fit anybody in

that's ineresting! You have a point there.

__________________Jerry and Joe were gentlemen. Bob Kane was a thief and a glory-hound who was more concerned about profit and prestige. I cannot bring myself to believe the same things about Stan Lee in regards to his two main contributors, Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko. I'm inclined to believe Stan's version of events as he has usually been very willing to credit his co-conspirators, but the truth is because different versions of credit exists, we will never truly know.

I think Noan can squeeze Freeze and Clayface after major remodeling of the characters. Hey, I couldnt think of how can he adjust Joker into our world yet with a big makeover he did. If he got Joker in, he can bring anybody in. Dont forget he already adjusted an immortal warlock and a white skinned clown. He can fit anybody in

But those changes included making the immortal warlock mortal. And making the white skinned clown....not white skinned.

But all of the principle aspects of the characters remained.

How would Clayface work? Clayface is inherently a fantasy based character. Based on his motivations and his actions.

Same for Man-Bat. He changed Ra's from immortal to mortal. But how could be alter someone like Man-Bat? By taking away his bat powers and transformation? Herein lies the difference. The unrealistic aspects of Ra's and Joker can easily be taken away and the core of the characters remain. This is not the case with Clayface or Man-Bat. However I do agree Freeze could be altered and fit nicely. But Nolan has already nixed the idea.

"We want to see the newest things. That is because we want to see the future, even if only momentarily. It is the moment in which, even if we don't completely understand what we have glimpsed, we are nonetheless touched by it. This is what we have come to call art." -Takashi Murakami

I know what you mean, but I absolutely couldnt figure out how Joker can be a real character. I didnt know theyre gonna go so far in changes, but yet there we had him. Perhaps clayface would be a guy who wears masks or is a master of disguise, and Man Bat someone with skin/hair problem. If Ras and , more so, Joker ended up as real life characters, I think anyone can